08/02/1999 Park Board Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

n t % SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 2, 1999 At the last Council work session, the City Council anticipating possible legal consequences, set a closed meeting to discuss eminent domain procedures. The Council is not prepared to order an eminent domain action at this time but needed legal advice from the City Attorney. There is time to make other decisions. Audience comment; there is a RLHA proposal to maintain the current trail until an alternate trail is completed. Audience question; is the Council considering condemning just the trail or all of the outlots. Mayor Sullivan replied only the trail. One of the abutting property owners stated that he has had only a five (5) minute discussion with Mr. DeGardner. He is willing to discuss the situation further with certain concessions but has never had any discussion with the other abutting ho epwner. Mayor Sullivan noted that the other homeowner is not willing to give acces mil. Council Member Bergeson said he would like to see if there g scam uwa 9 preserve the trail around the lake at or near its present location. He gave sine bac concerning how this situation was created. - Mayor Sullivan said that as long as some aces is preser .through Mallard Lane, she did not see the cost benefit for an eminent dntnain procedure. ai Council Member Dahl said she cofi*ered em menf`domain a last resort. The process is to expensive and causes bad f0lift H w ever she would like to see the current access maintained. She is ope to"", cion. I Council Member It th��traiIs have value for everyone. He felt that best practice was to mai a ent route. He has not made up his mind about eminent domain. Mayor Sulli' -'stat 'd that she is the only member of the Council to have voted against eminent dom n. The second homeowner abutting the current trail explained that he picked his lot because the developer assured him that the outlots were private. He noted that the trail is 30 feet from his living room. He also noted that the outlots were advertised as private lots and buyers were told they were private lots. This homeowner said he has had a number of conversations with Mr. DeGardner. There was discussion about moving the entire trail onto the property of the first homeowner. This would put the trail up against his house. If the developer really planned that this trail should be there, there should not have been an extra lot for another house. He suggested the best option is the Mallard Lane trail. Audience comment; unfortunately about 12 years ago the City did not plan ahead or plan correctly. Now the RLHA is facing people crossing association property and private Page 2